Pirate Bay To Launch VPN Service > Nice..

reply to denden2002

Re: Nice..

It's not stealing. It's copyright infringement. There's a difference.

Also, you never "buy" music or movies. You just buy a license to use it. You can't steal a license that was never issued to you, and if you use the music or movies (or software) without a license you are simply using it without a license, which is NOT stealing, since you aren't taking anything away.

You are taking the money out of the pockets of the people who deserve it, so yes... I call that stealing.
--
Tom

reply to fifty nine
You are not stealing the music or movie, true, but you are stealing the license and by association are depriving the rights owner of compensation. It is akin to "stealing" cable. If you hook yourself up illegally that does not directly reduce the supply of content for paying customers like stealing a CD or DVD from a store would, but the cable company is not getting the revenue they should from your use. Some might argue that the cable company is in the same bed with the AA's but that is another discussion.

By your definition I shouldn't have to pay for satellite TV since my unauthorized use does not cost Dish anything.

reply to trparky
They should get a 9-5 job like the majority of Americans do.

reply to trparky

reply to 75153785
No, an illegal cable or sat connection is theft of service.
Copying a file is Copyright Infringement.
While illegal, no theft occurs.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera

reply to trparky

reply to trparky
I agree with you that bands/actors and everyone behind the scenes that contribute have to be paid, otherwise where is the incentive.

Because i agree to support the artists (my brother is an actor so i know first hand), I support them in a more direct manner by attending their concerts and going to the cinema to watch the movies. I go very often actually (im quite surprised myself) If the movie was so good and is worth watching over and over i will certainly buy the Blu-Ray, i have done so and will continue to do it.

Your notion that bandwidth is expensive is false. It can be if youre distributing 1000 feeds all from a server farm with several huge pipes (thats so 1990's/early 2000's). If you take on that logistical burden then it can be slow, cumbersome and expensive. ifyoure looking at it from an innovative point of view bandwidth is actually very cheap, if you are creative about it. Instead of feeding tousands of people from one link, distribute the cost of bandwidth to the end users, i.e. Bittorrent! Its simple.. doesnt the new BBC IPTV work on that principle? This is where higher upload speeds of individual users can really be an asset and not a liability to aid in propagating cultural media. IPTV will take off and people will make money off it. The only dependancy to my and many others' idea is creativity.

reply to dadkins
Interesting but flawed defense. The only difference is the wording of a law. Practically, there is zero difference. That performance you are "not" stealing is indeed a service.

reply to trparky
Sorry I have to disagree. The RIAA and MPAA deserve NOTHING. The ARTIST deserves it all. The only power the RIAA and MPAA have is a big coffer of money to offer to an artist to basically write his rights away just to receive that money UP FRONT instead of collecting it little by little like an independent artist does.

Middle men is all the RIAA is. Without the artist, they are nothing.

reply to fifty nine
It stealing you can not sugar coat that not stealing. If I copy some of the pictures that photographer on dslr sell now is that stealing or not
--
Caddy

reply to 75153785
You can't steal something which was never issued, so you're not stealing the license.

reply to 75153785

reply to fifty nine

reply to 75153785
Cable or sat, is/are provided and kept up as a service... as is power or water.
A digital file in inert.
Copying a digital file does not require upkeep or maintenance.

Yes, they are vastly different!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera

reply to Caddyroger
To steal, you have to remove an item from the owner.
The owner cannot have further access to that item.

If you steal a beer, it is no longer in that store.
If you copy a file, the original is still there where it was to begin with - in the owner's possession.

You cannot(should not) distort the meanings of actions to suit your take on things.

Copying is not stealing.
Copying is copying.
You and I copy things everyday.

*IF* copying is stealing, then we all have stolen items we have backed up.
Everytime you install something on your computer, it states "Copying files".

THEIF!!!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera

reply to RadioDoc
I agree it is a straw man but the word "stealing" is often used to stir emotion.

Emotion is never a sound basis for public policy.

reply to dadkins
So if I copy all of the pictures on dsl reports then that not stealing but yet the photographers is out of money. If they are out of money then it is stealing. Copying should be the same as stealing.
To me anything that causes some one to lose money is stealing.
I would not you in my house.
--
Caddy